Of justification four disputations clearing and amicably defending the truth against the unnecessary oppositions…

sometimes more strictly for only such Actions as a Labourer performeth for his Wages, or which make the Reward to be not of Grace, but of debt. So Paul tells you that he understandeth or useth the term, Rom. 4.4. usually therefore calling them Works of the Law. Now he that excludes Works only under this notion, doth not therefore exclude them under every notion. Where you add that Pauls opposition is between Faith and any thing of ours: I answer. 1. Is not Faith ours as much Love, &c? 2. Are not Knowledge, Words, Works, ours, by all which God saith, we are justified? 3. There is no such Scripture where Paul makes any such opposition: but only he renounceth his own Righteousness which is of the Law, Phil. 3.8, 9. and any thing of our own that may be called Works in the stricter sense. Your second is, because Paul excludes Abraham's works, &c. Answer. 1. You make my tertium to be [works that are of Grace] and here again, works that flow from Grace, and say, Abraham's were not by mere strength of the Law: But these are no words of mine; nor is it candid to feign them to be mine; but that I impute it to your haste: I believe you remembered so well the words of Andradius, Bellarmine, and other Papists, that they dropped from your pen in haste in stead of mine; nor is my sense any whit like theirs; for I speak not of the efficient cause of works, (Nature or Grace) nor the mere command requiring them, when I speak of Law and Gospel: but the full entire Covenant or Law consisting of all its parts, and so making our Acts the conditions of the Punishment or Reward: as I have opened over and over in my Book. 2. You ask, Were Abraham's works in opposition to that, &c? Answer. 1. Paul excludes also works in co-ordination with Christ, and so do I. 2. Yea and works supposed to be subordinate to Christ, which are not capable of a real subordination, 3. but not such as are truly subordinate, from being such conditions as is before said. 4. You seem to me to mistake Paul much, as if he took it for granted, that Abraham had such works which Paul disputeth against, but could not be justified by them; Whereas I doubt not to say, that Paul contrarily supposeth that Abraham had no such Works, (which make the reward to be of Debt, and ⟨p. 191⟩not of Grace) and therefore could not be justified by them. Your third Argument is, [because imputing, covering, all is wholly attributed to God.]